On Aug 6, 12:54*pm, Andy wrote:
I was surprised by BB's comment in the US team blog about the uses of
water ballast at WGC. *He gives the impression that not only did most
pilots hang on to full ballast with very weak climbs and low bases,
but that he easily outclimbed them and still ran with them when he was
dry.

Why did so many of the world's top pilots keep full water in weak
conditions. *Sure, we all know you glide better but you have to be
able to climb before you can glide.

I seldom hesitate to dump when low in weak conditions. *My phisolophy
is that no expectation of better conditions later justifies not
climbing now, but I'll never qualify for a WGC.

Can someone who was there please comment on the use of ballast and how
bad conditions would have to be to dump. How much was ballast
management influenced by doing what the gaggle did and not wanting to
be the first to do something different?

Andy

We all seem to keep the water too long waiting for it to get good.
John's description is a very good example of the folly of this tactic.
It makes a lot of sense to be a little light if you can stay with the
gaggle in the glide and yet climb easier and maybe get an advantage.
Weight does really help in extended glide which may explain why
holding is preferred by many. I suspect if they were alone without
lots of other gliders to help with lift finding and centering, they
might do it a bit differently.
My personal experience would reflect that I've gotten hurt many more
times by being too heavy compared to being too light.
FWIW
UH